Opposition Leader

Articles by Cheddi Jagan 1964-1992

World Peace Council In Mainstream of History
by Cheddi Jagan

Mankind witnessed the horrors of the two world wars in the space of twenty-five years. World War II was a "war to end all wars" and "a war to make the world safe for democracy."

But soon after hostilities ended, those forces, unwilling to see humanity advance and to let science and technology be used to the service of man began the cold-war. Contrary to the terms of the Potsdam Treaty, Germany was re-armed. The main wartime aggressors, Germany and Japan, were built up militarily and economically in support of the policy of "containment of communism."

Some even advocated a pre-emptive strike against the Soviet Union with Atomic bombs, arguing that would settle once and for all in this so-called problems of the socialism and national liberation. It was in this atmosphere that the World Peace Movement was born. Great scientists and humanitarians who were associated with its birth, were unwilling to see science perverted. They lent their names and prestige to our great movement in the quest for world peace.

The beginning was not easy. The strident voice of anti-communism was a powerful weapon.

In the then British Guiana, for instance, the British Guiana Peace committee was singled out for attack soon after its formation. In the British White Paper on the suspension of the British Guiana Constitution and in forcible removal of the popularly elected (18 out of 24 seats) People’s Progressive Party (PPP) from the government in October, 1953, the British Guiana Peace Committee was cited, along with other international organizations.

The White Paper, inter alia stated:

"Meanwhile, the leaders have strengthened their links with Moscow and have boasted of their preference for the Russian way of life. Mrs. Jagan, who is Secretary of the party was a member of the Young communist League when in America, attended the third world congress of the Women’s International Democratic Federation (Communist) in Copenhagen in June, and later visited Rumania. Mr. Rory Westmaas is vice-president of the PPP and organizer of the local ‘peace committee’ and the Pioneer Youth League. He has recently been to a Communist organized international youth conference in Bucharest. Dr Jagan visited Berlin to attend an international youth conference, which was held under communist auspices in 1951. Three members of the party will attend the October meeting of the World Federation of Trade Unions in Vienna. "Mr. Sydney King another Minister, visited the WFTU, Vienna and Hungary in February, 1953."

In my book Forbidden Freedom (Lawrence and Wishart, 1954), referring to the spurious in British charges, I wrote:

"Reference is made in the White Paper to the visit of Mr. Sydney King and Mr. R.O. Westmaas to the World Peace Congress. The PPP does not regard membership of the World Peace Movement as a communist monopoly; many non-communist the world over belong to their organization.

As colonials we realize that unless new development schemes are embarked upon our standards of living will continue to be very low. Vast sums of money are being spent on armaments and war preparations. If only a fraction of this wealth could be used for construction projects in backward territories like British Guiana, the lives of the people there could quickly be changed.

We see nothing wrong with the Peace Appeal of the last World peace Congress, which said:

- ‘A great hope has been born. Everybody new sees that agreement is possible. The slaughter can be ended. The cold war can be stopped.

- ‘In this hour we solemnly call upon the peoples to demand of their governments that they negotiate and agree.

- ‘It is for us to support every move - from whatever government it may come - to solve disputes by peaceful means. It is for us all to frustrate the efforts of those who prevent or delay agreement.

‘Peace is within our reach. It is for us to win it."

Soon after the military destruction of the PPP government, the British Guiana Peace Committee was banned; among others, it was declared a subversive organization.

Two of our colleagues, Fred Bowman and Nasrudden, were charged with sedition. The famous peace fighter, D.N. Pitt came to defend them and fortunately secured their releases. To fight against colonialism then, was to fight against neo-colonialism today, was/is seditious and treasonable.

Peace was then regarded as subversive, and peaceful coexistence, the cornerstone of the World Peace Council, as the "Trojan horse" of international communism to lull the "vigilance" of capitalist states.

Later opposition came from the "ultra-leftist" and the "left" revisionists, who charged the WPC for pacifism, for "selling out". Peaceful co-existence they said, meant "reconciliation" with imperialism. This view I found prevalent in Canadian universities in 1968. Patiently, and I must admit in some cases unsuccessfully, I related my experience of the heated encounter between the Soviet and Chinese delegations on the questions of peaceful coexistence at the Tricontinental Conference in Havana in 1965. The Soviet delegation had pointed out that it was suicidal in this era of mass weapons - nuclear, chemical and bacteriological - of destruction to think of war for the settlement of disputes between the socialist and the capitalist states. For them, the Soviet delegations said, peaceful co-existence meant struggle, not war but peaceful competition. That did not imply, however, that there was to be no class struggle, no liberation struggle. The Soviet Union, he reiterated, would continue to aid all those who were fighting against class exploitation and national oppression.

Later, unfortunately, this same attitude on the part of China was to hamstring the work of the World Peace Council. But the world has travelled a long way. Today, China too accepts the principle of peaceful co-existence although regrettably she considers the Soviet Union as enemy Number One.

And peace is no longer regarded as a communist monopoly. Evidence of this was the historic congress of Peace Forces, held in Moscow in October 1973; which brought together from 144 countries more than 3,000 delegates of all walks of life - believers and non-believers, militants and pacifists, academic and laymen.

Credit for this great achievement must go to the World peace Council and its indefatigable General Secretary, Romesh Chandra, also to the peace programme and policies of the socialist states, particularly the Soviet Union.

The World Peace Council can look back with pride at 25 years of real service to mankind. Because of its unrelenting activity, coupled with the growing economic and military strength of the socialist world, many cold warriors have been forced to abandon their dreams of "containment," and their idea of bargaining from "position of strength". They have been compelled to accept the idea of peaceful co-existence.

But peace fighters must not be lulled into false sense of security. Imperialism has not given up its strategic aim of world domination. New methods are being devised to realize its objectives - "non military confrontation", "limited revelry", "partnership", ideological warfare and social strategy to combat national liberation.

The fourteen topics discussed at the World peace Congress of Peace Forces show that although much has been gained, there is still a great deal to be done.

A glorious perspective is opening up for the cause of world peace, on this its 25^th Anniversary, the World Peace Council must redouble its efforts and strengthen world unity of all anti-imperialist forces – the Socialist World, the national liberation movements and the progressive working class and peace fighter of the Capitalist world.

© Nadira Jagan-Brancier 2000

Speech by Dr. Cheddi Jagan in the National Assembly on

May 26, 1966 (Independence Day)

Your Royal Highnesses, Mr. Speaker, the severing of the British colonial tie in Guyana, and the attainment of political Independence are welcome features of the struggle of this country and its people for a better life. These features in today's context, do not, however, guarantee the realization of the better life we all seek. They merely represent a further stage, an advancement in the continuing struggle.

I wish to thank their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Kent, as representatives of Her Majesty the Queen, for their presence in this House to hand over the new Constitutional Instruments.

But lest our position at this historic ceremony be misunderstood, it is necessary for me to observe that the people whom my party represents hold considerable reservations.

The form of the Constitution being handed down at this time is one which perpetuates divisions in our society, and entrenches minority rule. The Constitution has failed to lay the foundation for national unity. The fundamental rights which the Constitution seeks to safeguard are, in a great measure non-existent, and the government has provided evidence in great abundance of its intention to render all safeguards nugatory.

Detention without trial has plagued the country since July, 1964, when, by a constitutional Amendment, the United Kingdom government gave to the Governor, acting without advice, powers to detain without trial. This power was made to appear, by the world press and radio, to have been exercised by the Government, of which I was the head. The powers were, in fact, arbitrarily exercised by the Governor, to the detriment of the members and supporters of the People's Progressive Party. Abuses of these powers, now transferred to the government, and the extension of the State of Emergency, beyond the date of the attainment of Independence, have generated fear in our land and have frustrated the efforts of many of our people in their struggle for peace and security.

As Leader of the Opposition, I have accepted invitations to consult with the Honourable Prime Minister, on the making of appointments to those important public offices, which form the pillars of Constitutional Government, but I regret to say that on no occasion, has there been any measure of agreement. The result is that those people, whom my Party represents, are denied any participation in the governmental process. Consultation has amounted, in practice, to no more than an intimation, on every occasion, of the names of persons whom the inflexible Government wished to prefer to high office in this land.

Besides, political independence has been attained under the continuation and consolidation of foreign economic control and the maintenance of the Colonial type of economy, based on primary production and extraction. This has already detracted from the living standards of the working people.

Debt burdens are already increasing with the resulting pressure on the economy. The annually recurring budgetary deficits will inevitably mean dependence on other Governments for budgetary support.

In these circumstances, there is no prospect for real Independence in external affairs and the protestations of the Government, of pursuing a neutral policy, are illusory.

The People's Progressive Party has been the victim of repeated constitutional manipulations designed to keep it out of office.

We are nonetheless confident that, despite these manipulations, the People's Progressive Party can be triumphant at future elections, if they are fairly held. Parliamentary democracy has an important place in this country, and a heavy onus lies on all of us, but more particularly on the Government, to see that it works.

The People's Progressive Party, the vanguard of Guyana's struggle for national liberation, is convinced that liberty is achieved only when it has been struggled for and won. It cannot be a gift of charity. For the people of Guyana, real freedom is still a prize to be won, and win it we will - as a re-united free people.

© Nadira Jagan-Brancier 2000

Address By Dr. Cheddi Jagan
At The Commemoration Of The
52nd Birth Anniversary Of Martin Luther King, Jr.
At Zion Baptist Church, New York, January 15,1981

Dear Friends, Brothers & Sisters:

For me, it is an honour and a privilege to be associated with this beautiful Brent - the commemoration service of the 52nd Birth Anniversary of one of America's most illustrious sons, Martin Luther King, Jr. By any standards, he must rank with the greats of our time. His contribution was immeasurable, his courage immense. He shouldered his tasks, never flinching, in the noble traditions set by Frederick Douglass, Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois, Paul Robeson and other fighters for freedom and liberation.

The magnitude at those tasks was well-appreciated by me. As a student at Howard University in Washington, D.C. in 1936-38 I had known what was meant by jim-crow and segregation - the facilities from which blacks wore excluded, the partition in the middle of inexpensive cinemas, separating Blacks and Whites; the seating of Blacks in the rear of a street-car as it moved across the state-line from Washington to East Virginia.

Black were regarded and treated as less than human. They were segregated and hammed-in in ghettos. And, as I myself experienced, it was practically the same whether one was in Washington, in Harlem, New York, or in Chicago. My friend and room-mate Dr. Orrin Dummett shared with me a room in the Black district of Washington D.C. surrounding Howard University. But in the near North side of Chicago, we couldn't do so; he secured a room in a Church, but only on condition that he looked after the heating system of the church and presbytery.

Jimcrow and segregation had a deep impact on the Black American psyche - and, let me add, affected students like me, coming from a different, colonial background. A concatenation of circumstances, national and international, worked on and inspired Martin Luther King to answer the call for leadership, to work and to break the chains that imprisoned body, mind and spirit.

These circumstances included the post-war anti-colonial struggle, the struggle for national liberation. In India, it was led by Gandhi's "non-cooperation and civil disobedience". In his college days, Martin Luther King had read much of and about Gandhi, and had heard Dr. Mordecai Johnson, President of Howard University in Washington, D.C., tell how the Mahatma had freed India by non-violent methods. Dr. Johnson was President in my time at Howard too.

Impetus was also given to the Civil Rights Movement in America by the convergence of the liberation struggles in Africa; in Kenya; in Ghana led by Kwame Nkrumah and in Guinea by Sekou Toure. Nkrumah had been associated with Dr. Du Bois in the Pan African movement. Cold war pressures in Egypt, Kenya, Ghana, Guinea and the non-aligned movement were similar to McCarthyite pressures against Paul Robeson and Dr. Du Bois. Those pressures fuelled the urgency for change on the Establishment. Those who wielded power in America began to see that their credentials, sanctified in the American Constitution and symbolized by the Statue of Liberty, were wearing thin in the eyes of the rest of the world and that something had to be done about jim-crow and segregation at home if the USA was to maintain its leadership role in the post-war world.

It was the long, heroic struggle of the bus boycott in Montegomery that plummeted Martin Luther King into the leadership that was to enrich the Civil Rights Movement in later years and carve a niche for him in the history of his country that time can never erase. It also sparked another flame. When a white minister joined Dr. King in travelling up front on a bus after victory had been attained; and they took a ride side by side in Montegomery, it can be said to symbolize what, as the years rolled on, has become a fact of life wherever the struggle for freedom is being waged; that resistance to oppression and injustice removes barriers of race, religion and, increasingly, social background, that believers and non-believer, that Marxists and non-Marxists, Communists and non-communists, can and do work together for a common goal.

Dr. King's was not a mere activist's vision, with blinkers. He did not see Black liberation as black separatism; a posting of Black against White. In the same way that Gandhi sought Hindu-Moslem unity in India, and we in Guyana fought for Indian-African unity, which we attained in the 1950-53 period in the fight against British colonial rule and now is about to be attained against neo-colonial rule under President L.F.S. Burnham. Martin Luther King Jr. saw the necessity for Black-White unity against the monopoly-capitalist power structure. He saw that the attainment of emancipation, full integration and full citizenship which the black people had been struggling for since the Emancipation Proclamation, could come about only with an anti-monopoly alliance of all progressive forces, Black and White.

Like a true revolutionary who sees the broad masses as the locomotive of history, Martin Luther King Jr. not only ministered to the needs of the down-trodden, but also moved to organize them. In the 1960's his Southern Christian Leadership Conference had begun clearing the way for the organization of the oppressed, the deprived and the poor, students and peace – fighters, and progressives of many ideological hues He himself cautioned against philistinism and sectarianism in 1968 in an article honouring Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois, Said Dr. King :

"We cannot talk of Dr. Du Bois without recognizing that he was a radical all of his life. Some people would like to ignore the fact that he was a communist in his later years. It is worth noting that Abraham Lincoln warmly welcomed the support of Karl Marx during the Civil War and corresponded with him freely. In contemporary life the English speaking world has no difficulty with the fact that Sean O'Casey was a literary giant of the twentieth century and a communist, or that Pablo Neruda is generally considered the greatest (living) poet, though he also served in the Chilean Senate as a Communist. It is time to cease muting the fact that Dr. Du Bois was a genius and chose to be a Communist. Our irrational obsessive anti-communism has led us into too many quagmires to be retained as if it were a mode of scientific thinking."

This is important as anti-communist hysteria has become the familiar weapon of the oppressors and reactionaries. In 1953, when the British landed troops in Guyana, overthrew the PPP government, and imprisoned me, they said that we were communists. When Anglo-American imperialism and the CIA joined forces with Burnham and destabilized the PPP government in 1964, they again said Jagan was communist and that we wanted to make Guyana into a second Cuba. When the racist fascists of South Africa imprisoned Nelson Mandela and later the US Cold Warriors persecuted Sister Angela Davis, as they had persecuted Paul Robeson and others, anti-communism was used as a pretext.

I recall my long association with Paul Robeson and being at London Airport to greet him when finally he was allowed to travel abroad. A year earlier when Dr. Du Bois had been prevented from leaving the USA, I had the honour of stepping into his reserved vacant seat from London to Accra for Ghana 'a independence celebrations.

The same cowardly veil of anti-communism has not masked their vile assassination of Lumumba and Cabral, Che Guevera and Allende, and our own beloved Walter Rodney, whose precious life was snuffed out in mid-1980 by the imperialist-backed PNC regime.

Dr. King fought for peace. He applauded when Mohamed Ali rejected his draft call-up, and in 1967 he denounced the war in Vietnam. Of that war he said -

"Somehow this madness must cease. We must stop now . . . I speak for the poor of America who are paying the double price of smashed hopes at home and death and corruption in Vietnam . . The initiative to atop it must be ours."

On UN Human Rights Day, 1964, in his acceptance statement after receiving the award of the Nobel Peace Prize, Dr. King said -

"I accept the Nobel Prize for Peace at a moment when twenty-one million Negroes of the United States of America are engaged in a creative battle to end the long night of racial injustices . . .

. . . I accept this award, today with an abiding faith in America and an audacious faith in the future of mankind . . . I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality.

I refuse to accept the cynical notion that nation after nation must spiral down a militaristic stairway into the hall of thermonuclear destruction. I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality . . . I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits . . . I still believe that WE SHALL OVERCOME."

On April 10, 1968, just six days after his assassination, part of the dream Dr. King dreamed came true - the long-delayed Civil Rights Act was passed. A most notable breach in the walls had been achieved. The intervening period - between 1964 and 1968 in America - was indeed one of "domestic fury and fierce civil strife" which was not Dr. King's preference and far from a prescription. But the militancy of the civil right struggle intermingled with the anti-Vietnam War feeling in the country; and fighters for Back liberation were often indistinguishable from or identified with the anti- Vietnam war sentiments of the people.

Vietnam was part of that third world for which Dr. King 's concern was clearly expressed: "Let us be dissatisfied until our brother of the third world - Asia, Africa and Latin America - will no longer be a victim of imperialist exploitation, but will be lifted from the long night of poverty, illiteracy and disease".

Dr. Martin Luther King not only had a dream; he worked towards its realization. As Congressman Ron Dellums beautifully put it: "The man King saw evil and tried to correct it. He saw immorality and tried to right it. He saw suffering and tried to end it. He saw war and tried to stop it . . ."

Dr. King was not only a man of ideas; he was equally a man of action. His commitment to genuine multi-racial unity in America, his steadfastness to the struggle for people's power, his faith in the masses resulted in the military industrial establishment trembling in paranoia convulsions. That is why they killed him. But they cannot kill his ideas. They can never kill what he stood for, which is winning out all over the world: national liberation, self-determination, social justice. It won out in Indochina and in Africa. It is winning out in our America. Revolutionary Cuba, Grenada and Nicaragua are living testimony that the tidal wave of social justice cannot be held back. And like a fire, Dr. King's dream is circling around the globe. It will one day descend also on this land where Dr. King dreamt his dream of a new world of peace and plenty.

Because of a commitment and steadfastness, he was cut down in the prime of his life. They killed him; but in every demand for equality, every demonstration for social justice, peace and freedom, Martin Luther King Jr. lives.

We pledge to struggle in the tradition of Martin Luther King Jr. That is the greatest tribute that we in Guyana can pay to his revered memory.

© Nadira Jagan-Brancier 2000